Diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 antigen test in the pediatric population: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Rapid identification and isolation of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 are critical methods for blocking COVID-19 transmission. The advantages of antigen tests, such as their relatively low cost and short turnaround time, can contribute to the prompt identification of infectious individuals. However, the diagnostic accuracy of antigen tests for COVID-19 in children remains inconclusive. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 in the pediatric population. METHODS: We conducted a literature search for relevant studies in the PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and Biomed Central databases. Studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 in pediatric patients were included. In addition, we included studies that provided sufficient data to construct a 2 × 2 table on a per-patient basis. The final literature search was performed on October 10, 2021. Days after symptom onset, asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals may have been potential sources of heterogeneity. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the antigen tests were generated using a bivariate random-effects model. RESULTS: Five studies with 4400 participants were included. The meta-analysis of antigen tests generated a pooled sensitivity of 65.9% (95% CI: 52.8%-77.0%) and pooled specificity of 99.9% (95% CI: 98.9%-100.0%). A subgroup analysis of studies reporting antigen test data for symptomatic patients showed a pooled sensitivity of 64.5% and a pooled specificity of 99.7%. The subgroup analysis of studies that included 881 asymptomatic participants generated a pooled sensitivity of 48.4% and a pooled specificity of 99.5%. CONCLUSION: Antigen tests exhibit moderate sensitivity and high specificity for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in children. Antigen tests might have moderate sensitivity for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic children, and serial testing might effectively prevent further SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

Diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 antigen test in the pediatric population: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Rapid identification and isolation of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 are critical methods for blocking COVID-19 transmission. The advantages of antigen tests, such as their relatively low cost and short turnaround time, can contribute to the prompt identification of infectious individuals. However, the diagnostic accuracy of antigen tests for COVID-19 in children remains inconclusive. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 in the pediatric population. Methods We conducted a literature search for relevant studies in the PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and Biomed Central databases. Studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 in pediatric patients were included. In addition, we included studies that provided sufficient data to construct a 2 × 2 table on a per-patient basis. The final literature search was performed on October 10, 2021. Days after symptom onset, asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals may have been potential sources of heterogeneity. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the antigen tests were generated using a bivariate random-effects model. Results Five studies with 4,400 participants were included. The meta-analysis of antigen tests generated a pooled sensitivity of 65.9% (95% CI: 52.8%–77.0%) and pooled specificity of 99.9% (95% CI: 98.9%–100.0%). A subgroup analysis of studies reporting antigen test data for symptomatic patients showed a pooled sensitivity of 64.5% and a pooled specificity of 99.7%. The subgroup analysis of studies that included 881 asymptomatic participants generated a pooled sensitivity of 48.4% and a pooled specificity of 99.5%. Conclusion Antigen tests exhibit moderate sensitivity and high specificity for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in children. Antigen tests might have moderate sensitivity for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic children, and serial testing might effectively prevent further SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

Investigation of the diagnostic performance of the SARS-CoV-2 saliva antigen test: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Rapid identification and isolation of patients with COVID-19 are critical strategies to contain COVID-19. The saliva antigen test has the advantages of noninvasiveness and decreased transmission risk to health-care professionals. This meta-analysis investigated the diagnostic accuracy of the saliva antigen test for SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We searched for relevant studies in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Biomed Central. Studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of saliva antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 were included. The data of the included studies were used to construct a 2 × 2 table on a per patient basis. The overall sensitivity and specificity of saliva antigen tests were determined using a bivariate random-effects model. RESULTS: Nine studies enrolling 9842 patients were included. The meta-analysis generated a pooled sensitivity of 65.3% and a pooled specificity of 99.7%. A subgroup analysis of the studies performing the chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA) for participants from airports and public health centers revealed a pooled sensitivity of 93.6%. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrated that the saliva antigen test performed using CLEIA exhibited higher sensitivity for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, the saliva antigen test performed using CLEIA might be an effective and noninvasive screening tool for SARS-CoV-2.

Evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19 antigen tests: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to affect countries worldwide. To inhibit the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), testing of patients, contact tracing, and quarantine of their close contacts have been used as major nonpharmaceutical interventions. The advantages of antigen tests, such as low cost and rapid turnaround, may allow for the rapid identification of larger numbers of infectious persons. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Biomed Central databases from inception to January 2, 2021. Studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of antigen testing for SARS-CoV-2 with reference standards were included. We included studies that provided sufficient data to construct a 2 × 2 table on a per-patient basis. Only articles in English were reviewed. Summary sensitivity and specificity for antigen tests were generated using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Fourteen studies with 8624 participants were included. The meta-analysis for antigen testing generated a pooled sensitivity of 79% (95% CI, 66%-88%; 14 studies, 8624 patients) and a pooled specificity of 100% (95% CI, 99%-100%; 14 studies, 8624 patients). The subgroup analysis of studies that reported specimen collection within 7 days after symptom onset showed a pooled sensitivity of 95% (95% CI, 78%-99%; four studies, 1342 patients) and pooled specificity of 100% (95% CI, 97%-100%; four studies, 1342 patients). Regarding the applicability, the patient selection, index tests, and reference standards of studies in our meta-analysis matched the review title. CONCLUSION: Antigen tests have moderate sensitivity and high specificity for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Antigen tests might have a higher sensitivity in detecting SARS-CoV-2 within 7 days after symptom onset. Based on our findings, antigen testing might be an effective method for identifying contagious individuals to block SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

Negative Impacts of COVID-19 Induced Lockdown on Changes in Eating Behavior, Physical Activity, and Mental Health as Modified by Digital Healthy Diet Literacy and eHealth Literacy.

Background: The COVID-19-induced lockdown has been implemented in many countries, which may cause unfavorable changes in lifestyles and psychological health. People's health literacy, healthy diet, and lifestyles play important roles in mitigating the negative impacts of the pandemic. Therefore, we aimed to examine associations of COVID-19 lockdown with changes in eating behavior, physical activity, and mental health; and the modification effects by digital healthy diet literacy (DDL) and eHealth literacy (eHEALS) on the associations. Methods: We conducted an observational study on 4,348 outpatients from 7th April to 31st May 2020. Data from 11 hospitals in Vietnam included demographic characteristics, DDL, eHEALS, eating behavior, physical activity, and mental health changes. Multiple logistic regression and interaction models were performed to examine associations. Results: Patients under lockdown had a lower likelihood of having "unchanged or healthier" eating behavior (odds ratio, OR, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 95%CI, 0.29 to 0.51; p < 0.001), "unchanged or more" physical activity (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.90; p < 0.001), and "stable or better" mental health (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.89; p < 0.001), as compared to those after lockdown. In interaction models, as compared to patients after lockdown and with the lowest DDL score, those under lockdown and with a one-score increment of DDL had a higher likelihood of having "unchanged or healthier" eating behavior (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.07; p < 0.001), and "stable or better" mental health (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.04; p < 0.001). Similarly, as compared to patients after lockdown and with the lowest eHEALS score, those under lockdown and with a one-score increment of eHEALS had a higher likelihood of having an "unchanged or more" physical activity (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.05; p < 0.001). Conclusion: The COVID-19 lockdown measure could negatively affect eating behavior, physical activity, and mental health among outpatients. Better DDL and eHEALS were found to mitigate the negative impacts of the lockdown, which may empower outpatients to maintain healthy lifestyles and protect mental health. However, this study holds several limitations that may undermine the certainty of reported findings.

Diagnostic Accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Tests for Community Transmission Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused the global pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Rapid identification and isolation of infectious patients are critical methods to block COVID-19 transmission. Antigen tests can contribute to prompt identification of infectious individuals. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2. We conducted a literature search in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Biomed Central databases. Studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 in community participants were included. Only English-language articles were reviewed. We included eligible studies that provided available data to construct a 2 × 2 table on a per-patient basis. Overall sensitivity and specificity for antigen tests were generated using a bivariate random-effects model. Eighteen studies with 34,865 participants were retrieved. The meta-analysis for SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests generated a pooled sensitivity of 0.82 and a pooled specificity of 1.00. A subgroup analysis of ten studies that reported outcomes for 5629 symptomatic participants generated a pooled sensitivity of 0.87 and a pooled specificity of 1.00. Antigen tests might have higher sensitivity in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic patients in the community and may be an effective tool to identify patients to be quarantined to prevent further SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

Single and Combinative Impacts of Healthy Eating Behavior and Physical Activity on COVID-19-like Symptoms among Outpatients: A Multi-Hospital and Health Center Survey.

BACKGROUND: Healthy eating and physical activity are effective non-pharmacological approaches to boost immune function and contain the pandemic. We aimed to explore the associations and interactions between physical activity and healthy eating behavior with COVID-19-like symptoms (Slike-CV19S). METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 3947 outpatients, from 14 February to 2 March 2020, at nine health facilities in Vietnam. Data collection included sociodemographic characteristics, healthy eating behavior (using the healthy eating score (HES) questionnaire), physical activity (using the short form international physical activity questionnaire), and Slike-CV19S. The associations and interactions were tested using logistic regression models. RESULTS: Frequent intake of fruits (OR = 0.84; p = 0.016), vegetables (OR = 0.72; p = 0.036), and fish (OR = 0.43; p < 0.001) were associated with a lower Slike-CV19S likelihood, as compared with infrequent intake. Patients with higher HES levels (OR = 0.84; p = 0.033 for medium HES; OR = 0.77; p = 0.006 for high HES) or being physically active (OR = 0.69; p < 0.001) had a lower Slike-CV19S likelihood, as compared to those with low HES or physical inactivity, respectively. Patients with medium HES who were physically active (OR = 0.69; p = 0.005), or with high HES and physically active (OR = 0.58; p < 0.001), had a lower Slike-CV19S likelihood, as compared to those with low HES and physical inactivity. CONCLUSIONS: Healthy eating behavior and physical activity showed single and combinative impacts on protecting people from Slike-CV19S. Strategic approaches are encouraged to improve healthy behaviors, which may further contribute to containing the pandemic.

Associations of Underlying Health Conditions With Anxiety and Depression Among Outpatients: Modification Effects of Suspected COVID-19 Symptoms, Health-Related and Preventive Behaviors.

Objectives: We explored the association of underlying health conditions (UHC) with depression and anxiety, and examined the modification effects of suspected COVID-19 symptoms (S-COVID-19-S), health-related behaviors (HB), and preventive behaviors (PB). Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 8,291 outpatients aged 18-85 years, in 18 hospitals and health centers across Vietnam from 14th February to May 31, 2020. We collected the data regarding participant's characteristics, UHC, HB, PB, depression, and anxiety. Results: People with UHC had higher odds of depression (OR = 2.11; p < 0.001) and anxiety (OR = 2.86; p < 0.001) than those without UHC. The odds of depression and anxiety were significantly higher for those with UHC and S-COVID-19-S (p < 0.001); and were significantly lower for those had UHC and interacted with "unchanged/more" physical activity (p < 0.001), or "unchanged/more" drinking (p < 0.001 for only anxiety), or "unchanged/healthier" eating (p < 0.001), and high PB score (p < 0.001), as compared to those without UHC and without S-COVID-19-S, "never/stopped/less" physical activity, drinking, "less healthy" eating, and low PB score, respectively. Conclusion: S-COVID-19-S worsen psychological health in patients with UHC. Physical activity, drinking, healthier eating, and high PB score were protective factors.

Negative Impact of Fear of COVID-19 on Health-Related Quality of Life Was Modified by Health Literacy, eHealth Literacy, and Digital Healthy Diet Literacy: A Multi-Hospital Survey.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has been disseminating fear in the community, which has affected people's quality of life, especially those with health problems. Health literacy (HL), eHealth literacy (eHEAL), and digital healthy diet literacy (DDL) may have potential impacts on containing the pandemic and its consequences. This study aimed to examine the association between the fear of COVID-19 scale (FCoV-19S) and the health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and to examine the effect modification by HL, eHEAL, and DDL on this association. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 11 hospitals across Vietnam from 7 April to 31 May 2020. Data were collected on 4348 outpatients, including demographic characteristics, HL, eHEAL, DDL, FCoV-19S, and HRQoL. Multiple linear regression and interaction models were used to explore associations. RESULTS: Patients with higher FCoV-19S scores had lower HRQoL scores (unstandardized coefficient, B = -0.78, p < 0.001). HL (B = 0.20, p < 0.001), eHEAL (B = 0.24, p < 0.001), and DDL (B = 0.20, p < 0.001) were positively associated with higher HRQoL scores. The negative impact of FCoV-19S on HRQoL was significantly attenuated by higher eHEAL score groups (from one standard deviation (SD) below the mean, B = -0.93, p < 0.001; to the mean, B = -0.85, p < 0.001; and one SD above the mean, B = -0.77, p < 0.001); and by higher DDL score groups (from one SD below the mean, B = -0.92, p < 0.001; to the mean, B = -0.82, p < 0.001; and one SD above the mean, B = -0.72, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: eHealth literacy and digital healthy diet literacy could help to protect patients' health-related quality of life from the negative impact of the fear of COVID-19 during the pandemic.